Support NeoGAF

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

This ignores that there's a lot of people out there that would be interested in buying a Sony game on PC but have no interest in buying a PS4. Millions, actually.

And I'm assuming those millions PC gamers never had a PS1 or 2 or 3 then? because the outright rejection to buy the console that Sony has since the beginning of time locked down their own exclusives for, did not all of a sudden change within that time. PC gamers really need to stop acting brand new.

 

[Tagyhag]

PC gamers make it seem as if PC rich gaming existed long before consoles and history will tell you that PC gaming benefited more from Consoles than Consoles ever did PC. All of a sudden, now exclusives and walled gardens are anti-consumer when they have been that way for YEARS. I'm literally cackling at the disgrace of that statement.

The absolute entitlement....

You think that walled gardens are pro-consumer?

I'm not blaming Sony for doing what they do because it is what's best for business.

But I'm not going to lie to other consumers and tell them that less options is actually good for them.

You're literally doing Sony's PR work for them.

 

[OsirisBlack]

In a word, no.

 

[Rain City Gamer]

This ignores that there's a lot of people out there that would be interested in buying a Sony game on PC but have no interest in buying a PS4. Millions, actually.

If you are that interested then you would buy a PS4 to play them. End of story.

If I want to eat a Big Mac I am not going to walk into a Burger King and complain that I have been going their for 5 years and they aren't serving Big Mac's yet, I am just going to go to McDonald's instead.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

If he has a Ps4 and a PC as I mentioned it has the value of being able to play third-party game on both machines without having to pay twice.

But the whole point of this endeavor is so that a PC gamer don't have to have a PS4, right? So again, why would that add value?

 

[B.O.O.M]

I swear this thread pops up every month or so now here. Most users blindly argue for the 'but revenue' point without considering an ounce of strategic pov or competitive advantage. It's essentially short sighted port begging

 

[Pixieking]

Those games require exponentially less time and resources to port than something like Demons Souls or Uncharted. Again, even if Sony were willing to compromise their platform exclusivity they would have to believe that the sales of a PC port of a 4 year (or older) game would justify the cost of making the port.

Yes, we're in agreement there. But also that's where we differ, because I think it would justify the cost, and you don't.

 

[Crayon]

Sony must be doing something right with all this port begging going on.

E3. I'm not into most sony first party up til now. Their games are very hard to dismiss now.

 

[wenaldy]

The only value a game should ever have is its quality, not exclusivity

Eh, exclusivity often cited as factor of game's quality.

 

[Majmun]

This ignores that there's a lot of people out there that would be interested in buying a Sony game on PC but have no interest in buying a PS4. Millions, actually.

I'm sure there are millions of Ps4 users interested in the new Zelda as well.

But I guess Nintendo is being very anti-consumer by keeping it Nintendo exclusive.

 

[Yazzees]

Does anyone else notice the irony in a demographic renowned for regarding moralizing as anathema demanding that a corporation change its business practices based on a niche moral gripe

 

[Doctor Ironic]

NO.



Nope, buy a PS for the exclusives and stop begging.

This is an overly hostile answer.

There's literally nothing wrong with more games being accessible to more people.

 

[jayu26]

This ignores that there's a lot of people out there that would be interested in buying a Sony game on PC but have no interest in buying a PS4. Millions, actually.

And that's the whole point. Sony is telling those millions, "buy a PS4, if you want to play these games." But you already knew that. Look these are just entertainment products. You don't need them, just like you don't need to watch Game of Thrones. But if you do, pay the piper.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Danganropa, first release 2010. Last release before the 2016 PC release was 2014.

I don't think you understand the issue.

Spike is a developer and publisher. That's all. Publishing on multiple platforms doesn't hurt them. Danganronpa was on iOS and Android way before PC anyways.

Sony is a platform holder and an ecosystem owner. There's a massive difference

 

[Ninja Scooter]

You think that walled gardens are pro-consumer?

I'm not blaming Sony for doing what they do because it is what's best for business.

But I'm not going to lie to other consumers and tell them that less options is actually good for them.

You're literally doing Sony's PR work for them.

I think the issue is the term "anti-consumer", which seems so over the top in issues like this. I mean, the fact that Sony sells me a game for $60 instead of $40 is "anti-consumer", and selling their games for cheaper would be "pro-consumer". I mean, if you want to play this game nearly everything any capitalist corporation does is "anti-consumer".

 

[HariKari]

While this is true, do you really trust Sony to not fuck up their own digital PC storefront? And then there's the question if if said storefront would interact with the console ecosystem in any way.

I mean, Microsoft is having a hard time with this now.

EA has done good. Origin launched smoother than Steam. I think people forget that Steam was a pile of shit for years. Microsoft wants their windows store to do a lot more than just sell PC copies and they've always done it halfhearted. After GFWL they really are fighting an uphill battle.

EA basically has the Battlefront/field franchise, plus Dragon Age/Mass Effect powering their platform. Titanfall as well. Sony could do a lot better with their exclusives, IMO.

If you are that interested then you would buy a PS4 to play them. End of story.

If I want to eat a Big Mac I am not going to walk into a Burger King and complain that I have been going their for 5 years and they aren't serving Big Mac's yet, I am just going to go to McDonald's instead.

A burger is a great analogy for a $300+ hurdle to buying a game. Absolutely.

 

[Zemm]

They need something for PS Plus.

 

[LilJoka]

Yes they should. Restricting consumers isn't good. They make hardly anything on hardware anyway.
They can do PS+ like EA origin on PC.

 

[NastyBook]

No. Nobody wants to read the inevitable shitposts on here about "Wow, that game looks good, this 4 year wait will be difficult, but worth it for a PC version. =P"

This is an overly hostile answer.

There's literally nothing wrong with more games being accessible to more people.

I never realized that people that owned PCs weren't capable of buying PS4s and having access to said games. What a terrible fate.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

If you are that interested then you would buy a PS4 to play them. End of story.

If I want to eat a Big Mac I am not going to walk into a Burger King and complain that I have been going their for 5 years and they aren't serving Big Mac's yet, I am just going to go to McDonald's instead.

Which is why Sony will keep their fast food in their own cafeteria and everyone else hoping they can turn those burgers into rib-eye steaks will keep begging.

 

[Nzyme32]

When / if the games are no longer critical to selling a console, then yes I don't see why they shouldn't. Otherwise there are some obvious reasons why they shouldn't

 

[Hugstable]

I think it'd be awesome for both Nintendo and Sony to have games release on PC, then it'd make it easy for me to have most games in one place (except my handheld/portable stuff).

The chance of this ever happening though is pretty much zero. Both of them rely on their exclusives alot more than Microsoft to sell their systems. Even then many would be upset cause if they did, I doubt they would release on Steam at first and would probably end up setting up their own PC Store/Service.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

A burger is a great analogy for a $300+ hurdle to buying a game. Absolutely.

about as good of an analogy as your HBO one.

 

[starpiercer]

Even if Sony was to put their games on PC, it would be on their terms and no one else. I couldn't imagine them putting their games on Steam. Sony would probably make a Win 32 and UWP app for themselves to control the store.

You may see Sony PS4 games on their streaming service very soon but on PC? Nope.

 

[Freeman]

But the whole point of this endeavor is so that a PC gamer don't have to have a PS4, right? So again, why would that add value?

No. The point is to make some money where right now they make no money. Get money of people that own a PS4 but chose to buy multiplats from Steam, etc.

As a Vita owner I know that crossbuy adds value. A indie game I get on PS4 and is playable on the Vita is more valuable than the same game on PS4(or PC) that isn't playable on the Vita (since playing indies on the Vita is convenient and awesome)

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

You think that walled gardens are pro-consumer?

I'm not blaming Sony for doing what they do because it is what's best for business.

But I'm not going to lie to other consumers and tell them that less options is actually good for them.

You're literally doing Sony's PR work for them.

What work?! Your making it seem like this so called walled garden hasn't existed for YEARS. That's what I'm saying. It isn't all of a sudden a walled garden because PC gaming is on the rise? Wtf? Considering the fact that Sony has never made the PlayStation an open platform, I really don't understand what's anti-consumer about it.

If Sony is taking money out of their pockets to fund their own studios and fund their own games, make their own hardware they have the RIGHT to dictate where that product goes. And if they don't want it on PC they have the right to do so. This walled garden has always been there and isn't leaving so no, it isn't anti-consumer. Is it anti consumer that Apple doesn't make iOS an option for Android phones? Absolutely not. If they created iOS to be that way and never promised anything outside that, then it is what it is. I'm afraid it is y'all that does not understand what anti-consumer means.

 

[jayu26]

I see a way they'd make some money without losing any exclusive. I'd go for it, you never know what is going to happen in the next gen, maybe their console fails for whatever reason and having a presence on PC might be a good outing.

yes, the day their console fails horrifically, is the day they might look into this. Not today, it doesn't make any sense.

Another door it would open up is for PC and PS4 "Exclusives" that are actually can only be purchased on Sony store. Would be very convenient for VR for example or deals like SFV.

Yes, because PC gamers love VR exclusive titles.

 

[Tagyhag]

I think the issue is the term "anti-consumer", which seems so over the top in issues like this. I mean, the fact that Sony sells me a game for $60 instead of $40 is "anti-consumer", and selling their games for cheaper would be "pro-consumer". I mean, if you want to play this game nearly everything any capitalist corporation does is "anti-consumer".

If Sony is taking money out of their pockets to fund their own studios and fund their own games, make their own hardware they have the RIGHT to dictate where that product goes. And if they don't want it on PC they have the right to do so. This walled garden has always been there and isn't leaving so no, it isn't anti-consumer. Is it anti consumer that Apple doesn't make iOS an option for Android phones? Absolutely not. If they created iOS to be that way and never promised anything outside that, then it is what it is. I'm afraid it is y'all that does not understand what anti-consumer means.

Yes those people are wrong. Sony's doing what they have to do and they're not actually doing any anti-consumer practices.

But I also won't say that all their actions are pro-consumer.

Valve funding VR games and saying that they can be put everywhere is pro-consumer.

 

[RedRum]

Definitely not in Sony's vision. Sony wants you on the hardware, MS wants you on the ecosystem. Sony already said they want to keep people off of PC and on consoles.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

No. The point is to make some money where right now they make no money.

And giving people who already game on PC rigs, who have no reason to have a PS4, a free copy of a game on a platform they probably don't need, is not a way to make money. It's like a company selling an App on iOS and giving people a free copy of the Android app. LIke, the amount of people for who this will be worthwhile to is too minuscule to even matter.

 

[Pixieking]

I don't think you understand the issue.

Spike is a developer and publisher. That's all. Publishing on multiple platforms doesn't hurt them. Danganronpa was on iOS and Android way before PC anyways.

Sony is a platform holder and an ecosystem owner. There's a massive difference

Is there? A console exclusive is a console exclusive, surely? What's the difference between Helldivers, Everybody's Gone To The Rapture and Danganropa? The first two were semi-funded by Sony, afaik, and are console-exclusives that are on PC. The second is a console-exclusive and on mobiles and PC.

This is why I posted saying maybe we should differentiate.

 

[-Amon-]

This ignores that there's a lot of people out there that would be interested in buying a Sony game on PC but have no interest in buying a PS4. Millions, actually.

Sony would put their exclusives on Pc if they could make more money by doing that, for sure.

Neo and Psvr clearly show that they don'see it that way.

 

[UCBooties]

Yes, we're in agreement there. But also that's where we differ, because I think it would justify the cost, and you don't.

And the source of this belief is...?

And please, spare me a list of XSeed ports or pointing to Dark Souls 3's PC performance. Neither of those are even close to the situation you're advocating. Ports of full console titles require not just a large investment of money, they also incur a massive opportunity cost as the developers you are paying to develop and test the port are not working on other new content for your system. What makes you so confident that this is a winning trade for Sony?

How much do you think they could justifiably charge for a port of Demons' Souls or Uncharted? How many copies do you think those ports would sell in their first six weeks at full price? Do you think that Sony is incapable of making projections based on past performance?

 

[formasymphonic]

I'd never buy another Playstation if they did this. So no.

Sure, I'd welcome that. Just means another console purchase I don't need to make. Nintendo + pc with Sony and Ms exclusives? Sounds great to me.

This is exactly why there is no benefit to them doing it. Sony and Nintendo know the purpose and value of exclusives.

Just because MS is doing it doesn't mean the others should follow suit. MS has their reasons, Sony/Nintendo have there's

 

[Yazzees]

I really don't understand what's anti-consumer about it.

Because "anti-consumer" throughout this discussion is being used as a euphemism for "not available on PC"

I don't know if it was specifically Totalbiscuit who coined/popularized this but he's the first person I remember hearing it from in that sense

 

[Majmun]

ITT: Competition is anti-consumer

I'm laughing my ass off.

 

[Freeman]

And giving people who already game on PC rigs, who have no reason to have a PS4, a free copy of a game on a platform they probably don't need, is not a way to make money. It's like a company selling an App on iOS and giving people a free copy of the Android app. LIke, the amount of people for who this will be worthwhile to is too minuscule to even matter.

Selling people what they don't need is the essence of making money.

Example:
Watch Dogs 3, availiable on Steam for 60$ or availiable on Sony Store for 60$ (playable both on PC and PS4). Which one would you chose? (You can assume their store is like EAs).

That's 15$ or so that they made out people that were going to buy it on Steam, if they are able to convince them.

Yes, because PC gamers love VR exclusive titles.

They seem to like exclusives enough to port beg for them. Sony could also get on the business of selling VR for PC in this situation, that is the whole point.

 

[TheSpoiler]

This is the new way of portbegging.

 

[DarkLordMalik]

If exclusives need to be dropped altogether, why not just release on every platform under the sun.

Sony should release their games for Xbox One and NX. Nintendo for PS4 and Xbox One. Microsoft for PS4 and NX. I just don't get this mentality of everything needs to be on 'PC' because it is my preferred platform.

It is pretty clear from Microsoft's strategy that they consider exclusives vital in selling consoles hence why their games won't be released on PS4. The same applies to Sony. It is just that they have Windows 10 as a product and they plan to support it along with their console and have invested in the platform, hence their strategy makes much more sense.

There is nothing like that for either Sony or Nintendo. Infact I saw so many people saying they will buy NX or Wii U just because Zelda is an 'exclusive' for it. Imagine the reactions if Zelda was for PC as well.

Ironically people cry about the delayed ports on Steam but here we have a proposition of 4-5 years delayed release of the game, which won't likely launch at much more than $20. If they release it at $40-$60, then PC owners will crucify the publisher and they usually wait for sales anyways, so it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. Unless the publisher is going broke, they risk less attractiveness for their platform going forward at the cost of meager increase in revenue depending on the game.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Is there? A console exclusive is a console exclusive, surely? What's the difference between Helldivers, Everybody's Gone To The Rapture and Danganropa? The first two were semi-funded by Sony, afaik, and are console-exclusives that are on PC. The second is a console-exclusive and on mobiles and PC.

This is why I posted saying maybe we should differentiate.

No.

A console exclusive made by a third party is a different story than a console exclusive made by a first party. Even semi-funded is closer to the former rather than the latter.

Also I mean, come on. The sales for Everybody's Gone to the Rapture is a different beast than something like Bloodborne.

 

[Pixieking]

And giving people who already game on PC rigs, who have no reason to have a PS4, a free copy of a game on a platform they probably don't need, is not a way to make money. It's like a company selling an App on iOS and giving people a free copy of the Android app. LIke, the amount of people for who this will be worthwhile to is too minuscule to even matter.

Where do you get "free", from?

And, once again, 12m concurrent Steam users recently. That's a lot of eyeballs looking at your game.

 

[Altered Juice]

huge charge of PC gaffers on their knees for console games...did PC not have a e3 conference? must have been dry AF!!!

47 games revealed and you still thirsty!

 

[Jonneh3003]

ITT : Competition is anti-consumer

NeoGaf and gamefaqs should just merge, being two different sites is anti consumer.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Because "anti-consumer" throughout this discussion is being used as a euphemism for "not available on PC"

I don't know if it was specifically Totalbiscuit who coined/popularized this but he's the first person I remember hearing it from in that sense

I wonder what's next. It's anti-consumer that Sony doesn't put their first parties on Xbox now? Or that cortana isn't on PlayStation ? Or Nintendo is holding Zelda hostage from everyone because they refuse to put it on all systems including PC?

💀💀💀

 

[Pixieking]

No.

A console exclusive made by a third party is a different story than a console exclusive made by a first party. Even semi-funded is closer to the former rather than the latter.

Okay. Why? Are you saying that the new Kojima game isn't going to be a system-seller? Is SFV not a good reason to get a PS4 over an XBox?

 

[jackdoe]

Definitely not in Sony's vision. Sony wants you on the hardware, MS wants you on the ecosystem. Sony already said they want to keep people off of PC and on consoles.

Sony's hardware is their ecosystem. If Sony develops their own storefront/app on the PC, their ecosystem will grow to include the PC, and the likelihood of PC ports would skyrocket exponentially.

 

[Majmun]

NeoGaf and gamefaqs should just merge, being two different sites is anti consumer.

Why can't I post with your account? That's pretty anti-user!!

 

[Jonneh3003]

Okay. Why? Are you saying that the new Kojima game isn't going to be a system-seller? Is SFV not a good reason to get a PS4 over an XBox?

Sure but there are other PS4 exclusives that aren't on PC which may convince someone to choose PS4 over upgrading their PC.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

I was having a talk with some friends about this. One of them brought up the point that after 3 to 4 years they've most likely made a good majority of their sales on games like Bloodborne, Infamous Second Son, Killzone SF, etc. There are tons of copies for resale in most stores for super cheap. Why not make an attempt to port some of them for the PC maybe 3 to 4 years after they originally release?

I'm sure the PC crowd would eat up Bloodborne with many people no doubt double or triple dipping. Then you can imagine that a Neo patch might come out that will bump up the AA, the FPS to 60, and add some other bells and whistles like maybe better looking blood and such. These could just be settings on the PC for those with the stronger rigs needed to run them. Then on top of that Sony could do cross play between PS4/Neo and PC players and possibly reinvigorate a flagging MP scene on the console side.

Obviously there are porting costs as I'm sure some of the engines Sony first party developers are using would need some tweaking as would the game to run a wide gamut of PC gaming hardware. Though they already have excellent porting studios like Bluepoint and could no doubt find others to work with to help them do this. Anyways, what say you GAF?

So does this idea sound insane to you GAF or could it be a sensible move for Sony?Extend the life of their games, preserve and grow multiplayer player pools, and of course make them more money by selling to a crowd who might never had a chance to touch these games. And of course... modding but that could be the elephant in the room I Suppose.

No.

Please no port-begging.

 

[old manatee]

Nah, 6 months to a year.